Recruitable Unit Rebalance Version 7.51 Released.

[wombatsSAR]

The whole reason for me posting was to weigh in was because various comments that desired a sim approach. I felt that some of the suggestions for the sim side were not accurately describing various phenomena and I wanted to add information from various knowledgable sources. I am not an expert on these subjects but I am moderately well-read.

Sim: xbows blow away everything else in terms of sheer hitting power. At least the steel variety. The pre-steel ones score over the traditional bows in being MUCH easier to train peasants to an adequate level of skill. They are cheaper to stock and the bows are more durable than regular bows. Reload rates sucked but then, if you kill them first, you don't have to parry.

Sim: pointy things - all of the pointy weapons are armor piercing in effect. They plant an enormous overpressure on the armor causing a point failure. The longbow and composite bows had enough force to let them pierce plate when using properly designed arrowheads. These bodkin points did a good job at piercing various armors but were inferior to a broadhead for inflicting wounds (we're neglecting sepsis here). The xbow did it by sheer force. Afaict, there were no bodkin point quarrels. One design sufficed for all applications.

Thus, my recommendations for a sim that longbowmen and composite bowmen have higher resource costs to reflect their long training times. Their projectiles should be AP but of low value to simulate the fact that the resulting wounds were of lesser severity. Even short bows should be AP but without the draw weight behind them, they couldn't do all that much. Spears and lances should be AP when used in charges. By precise definition, so should spears in static melee but the impact velocities probably don't make it worth defining that way, at least not for human wielders.

One obvious "flaw", as it were, is that the battlefield is so short that the effective ranges of the various missile weapons are ... modififed. This truncation results in the combatants starting very close together resulting in the effectiveness of bow fire being compromised. This could be hacked but I'm not sure if the game would support that???

[BigDaddy]

wombatsSAR said:

. . .Sim: xbows blow away everything else in terms of sheer hitting power. At least the steel variety. . .

I looked into this for quite some time to prove that medieval x-bow where more powerful than medieval longbows. However, I found that that wasn't the case. Because of the inferior engineering and material medieval x-bow where made from, they where limited to a very short draw length, and the quarrel never even remotely approached its maximum velocity. Because of the respective weight of the missles, both end up being nearly the same. The difference from my historical research, was that longbowmen where actual troops, who carried swords, wore light armor, and could really fight. They fired faster, and hit more. A x-bowman, was just a conscript with an x-bow.

Today's x-bow have an incredible draw length. The bow goes from nearly straight to "V" shaped. This increased draw lenght allows the projectile to reach incredible velocities. Far superior even to compound bows. That was not the case in medieval times.

[BigDaddy]

I also found this:

"Surprisingly, a good slinger hurled a stone as far and accurately as a good archer. Roman military texts recommended archery target practice at about 200 yards. Slingers are known to hurl their projectiles even farther, as much as 440 yards (quarter of a mile)."

Sling stones ranged from golf ball sized pieces of lead to rocks the size of a tennis balls, and where tooled round. Slinging was a sort of game to ancient people, who made their own stones, and practiced for fun.

Also,
"As for accuracy, one ancient writer noted that the best slingers "would wound not merely the heads of their enemies but any part of the face at which they might have aimed." Experiments demonstrate that missiles leave a sling in excess of 60 miles per hour. One Roman writer noted that opponents in leather armor were in far greater danger from sling missiles than arrows. Even if the stone did not penetrate the armor, it was capable of inflicting a fatal internal injury."

I couldn't find information on the effectiveness of armor on slingstones, but I'd just assume slingstone aren't AP.

[Arralen]

Concerning Staff Slings
http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/nikolas.l...taffsling.html
that's what I read from it (someone should check vs. historical sources)
- staff slings do more damage (due to heavier projectiles), but do not necessarily shoot further
- normal slings may carry a shield (AFAIK, historically they didn't, but would be nice in DOM )

Concerning BigDaddy's post:
That's basically what I said before. Nice to see that someone checks the sources instead of re-telling misconceptions from Hollywood Movies ... Didn't have the time to dig anything up myself besides the Wargamers Research Groups Tabletop Rules.

Btw., those roman texts speak about shortbows, o.c., which are roughly equal to slings.
Concerning the range, one has to be careful that not effective and maximum range is compared - what I believe is the case with the above figures.

It's very obvious, however, that slings and bows (longbows too) where used for "mass archery", not for sniping.

Xbows where used in siege warfare and as sniper weapons against (and from) infantry forming a "shield wall".


Here's a pic from the "Maciejowski-Bible" (ca. 1250 A.D. ; Piermont Morgan Library, New York), which clearly shows:

- usage of iron pot-helmets and full chain (which even covers the hands) by knights and infantry.
- the Xbow-man only has (darker) leather cap and no chain mail, he's protected by a heavily armored infantry man with shield
- the Xbow is not pressed against the shoulder, it doesn't have a rifle stock.
- Xbow is used to snipe at single defenders, obviously successful

.

[wombatsSAR]

BigDaddy said:
I also found this:

"Surprisingly, a good slinger hurled a stone as far and accurately as a good archer. Roman military texts recommended archery target practice at about 200 yards. Slingers are known to hurl their projectiles even farther, as much as 440 yards (quarter of a mile)."

Could you toss the source for this quote at me? I know I've read it as well but can't recall where now. As regards to penetration, I do remember someone else claiming that a sling could cause spalling on a bronze cuirass. Again, not worth that much without a reference.

[wombatsSAR]

BigDaddy said:

I looked into this for quite some time to prove that medieval x-bow where more powerful than medieval longbows. However, I found that that wasn't the case. Because of the inferior engineering and material medieval x-bow where made from, they where limited to a very short draw length, and the quarrel never even remotely approached its maximum velocity. Because of the respective weight of the missles, both end up being nearly the same.

hmmm, that would contradict what Payne-Gallway has claimed for his experience in actually firing some bows from around that time, in terms of range. I do realize that medieval metallurgy was no where near a modern standard. Some sources claim that the shattering of the steelbow could seriously injure the user. That's probably seldom a modern problem. As for the two being nearly the same in practice, could be. My only real argument is with the recruitment scheme.

The difference from my historical research, was that longbowmen where actual troops, who carried swords, wore light armor, and could really fight. They fired faster, and hit more. A x-bowman, was just a conscript with an x-bow.

Aye, that would be the biggest advantage, afaict for the xbow. It was given to a peasant and he could actually hit something and do so with enough force to hurt the target.



[/quote]Today's x-bow have an incredible draw length. The bow goes from nearly straight to "V" shaped. This increased draw lenght allows the projectile to reach incredible velocities. Far superior even to compound bows. That was not the case in medieval times.

[/quote]

... and because I'm feeling combative, can you list your sources for your assertions regarding the effectiveness of the xbow? Actually, it's also that I like reading up on such things.